The Wine Society Order Form: Fill & Download for Free

The meaning of the word NO is NO !Let’s take a hypothetical situation.An educated girl working for a MNC is married in a respected family. Let’s call her Mitali. It is a completely arranged marriage in which Mitali never got a chance to interact with any other member of the family except her fiancé Shashank, to know them better. Shashank’s family is highly respected in the society and all that Mitali ever heard people taking about the family is only GOOD.The entire wedding ceremony was a dream come true to Mitali. Being from a decent financial background and her earning herself; there was no such a thing that she had to refrain herself from due to lack of finances. The new family welcomed her with open arms and showered her with love which every married bride will long for.Fast forward to Two weeks to wedding ceremony:After the initial pujas, havans, temples and relative visits, Shashank’s family decided to arrange a special surprise dinner only within the family to make the new bride comfortable.All was going well on the dining table, till the time dinner was served and the wine bottle opened.Now, drinking alcohol on a dining table with family may be a trivial well accepted matter for many families while at the same time, it may be a totally unacceptable thing in others.Okay, so when the wine glasses were filled and Mitali’s sister-in-law passed her one,Mitali: Sorry dear! I don’t drink alcohol. (Mitali declined politely.)Sister in law: Come-on bhabi! You don’t drink wine? Chill.. it s just wine. Its not alcohol.Mitali: Its okay dear. I really don’t consume alcohol in any form. You all enjoy. I’ll enjoy the bottle of Sprite from fridge with you all.Mother-in-law: Wine is a ladies’ drink Mitali. You have joined our family now. You should have it. And you work in such a big company right. We all know drinks are served during corporate parties. Come-on now. No need to be shy. Everyone come, lets say cheers.She didn’t pick her glass still. She looked at her husband with hopes that he will understand her. Knowing her since since last six-seven months, Shashank totally knew the nature of his wife very well and that she wont change her morals at any cost due to some temporary pressure. In order to not to let her feel alone,he declared:Shashank: Guys aaj mera bhi wine ka mann nahi hai! (Today I too don’t have the mood to drink wine!) Bro, you can take my glass.Mitali: (Sensing the edginess of the situation) Hey! you please carry on. They got it for us specially.Shashank: Relax dear. It’s not because …Sister: (Trying hard to control her laughter) Oh hooo Bhai!!! since when did you stop drinking?Mother: From second week itself started getting scared of your wife? Don’t dance so much on her beats.Brother: Bhabi see you spoiled the mood today. You stopped bhai also from enjoying with us. We had specially planned the dinner for you both. Take one sip at least. Bhai! I have got the best quality. Smell it and see you wont be able to resist yourself.Mitali: (Loosing her temper) I never told him not to have drinks. It’s just that personally I am not comfortable with drinking. It’s the way I am raised and things worked in and around me for years.(She continues, trying best to contain her sanity …)And yes we have corporate parties at office but there are many like me who don’t drink; so it has never caused any inconvenience till now even when I visited abroad for conferences.I am fully aware that he enjoys occasional drinks and I am totally fine with it. My rationalism certainly doesn’t allow me to stop him from enjoying the things he wants till the point I know its not something that causes harm.You please have it. I don’t want them to spoil their mood because of me.Shashank: I can’t enjoy myself making you uncomfortable that too in the 2nd week of our marriage. Its my choice I am abstaining alcohol today not from anyone's pressure.Mother in law: Wine is must during pregnancy! You will be required to have it during your…Shashank: Mom please..Now, the question is, what is Mitali’s mistake where she just informed that she is not comfortable with a particular kind of drink in this world. If some one doesn’t drink soft drinks everyone understands, if someone doesn’t like a vegetable we always remain extra careful not to prepare it if we are having that person as our guest. Then why is so much of insisting if someone declares he/she is not comfortable with alcohol.If you feel a person is shy to say yes, ask him/her once or twice again. If still he/she says no then understand that its a clear NO.Everyone has their own reason for their every No or Yes. They may not be comfortable sharing it with you. You don’t have to be judgemental about it.It is totally not okay to judge a person based on his place of work or position in society.If a spouse doesn't drink alcohol and the other one leaves it too for him/her, it is not always the case that he/she controls him/her. It may be love and sheer understanding between the two.Why can’t we just accept someones’s NO as just a No and move ahead.Its high time our society needs to understand this.A NO means a NO and not “Insist me more and I will say Yes”.

I’ll regurgitate a previous answer that addresses this Question .Wild Geese’. The flight of the Wild Geese actually refers to the exodus of Irish soldiers to France at the end of the 1600’s following the Willamite-Jacobite war. This war involved a conflict between the Catholic King James 11 and the Protestant King William of Orange, over who would rule Ireland, England and Scotland. King William won. Today the term “Wild Geese’ is more broadly used to define all Irish emigrant families who fled Ireland for various reasons in the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries to join various continental European armies and fight in their wars.Those Irishmen serving in armies abroad hoped that their efforts fighting for a foreign power would, somehow, help to gain support for Irish freedom. This phenomenon dates back to the creation of the Irish Regiment in the Spanish Army of Flanders in the 1580s, and continued through such famous Irish events as the Flight of the Earls in 1607 and the departure of the “Wild Geese”in the latter half of the seventeenth century .Flight of the Wild Geese - WikipediaAll told – and the numbers are a bit screwy because of a lack of solid record-keeping – it’s estimated that near 70,000 Irishmen had left the country to fight in foreign armies by 1700.There are many famous units from the Irish Military Diaspora over the centuries, including the French Irish Brigade in the War of the Palatinate, Napoleon’s Irish Legion,The Wild Geese reminds us that there is an historical tradition of Irish cultural and social integration in Europe which long predates the European Union. That tradition separates us from our near neighbours in England in our attitude toward Europe cough cough Brexit , the Scottish don't count they had just as many historical links to the continent as the Irish .The Irish were very good at in integrating with the host society we had the ability to absorb its culture; to acquire wealth and honours; to contribute to its cultural, professional, economic and political life; the capability to rise to the highest positions of state and yet to retain, in balance, a sense of one's own ethnic origin and identity." On all these criteria,Stanley Kubrick captures this in his movie Barry Lyndon he shows how the Irish had integrated in to European society.Barry meeting a fellow Irish man the Chevalier de BalibariThe Irish made a remarkable contribution to their host societies in Austria, Spain and France. The multinational character of the Hapsburg empire meant it was hospitable to the advancement of such gifted foreigners from a displaced Catholic Irish aristocracy, many of whom had fled Ireland after the Battle of Kinsale, a pattern that continued throughout the following two centuries, driven by the Penal Laws and the Protestant Ascendancy. They participated in the Thirty Year War (1618-1648) on the Catholic side, reminding us that we can never separate Irish or British history from European history in the 17th and 18th centuries - nor in any other centuries.A list of officers of probable Irish origin in the imperial army from 1630-1830 runs to 1,500 individuals.Among this émigré elite, seven were awarded the Order of the Golden Fleece, the most exclusive chivalric honour in Europe. Their names reveal some of the most prominent families involved: Franz Taaffe (1694), Franz Wenzel Wallis von Carrighmain (1751), Maximilian Ulysses von Browne (1757), Franz Moritz de Lacy (1766), Joseph O'Donnell (1810), Laval Nugent (1852) and Eduard Taaffe (1878).Other prominent names include Kavanaghs, Butlers, Plunketts, McGuires, Barrys, Bradys, Banfields, Hamiltons and Forbes.A revealing cameo from the 1780s tells how the Irish tenor Michael Kelly met a group of generals with Emperor Joseph II including Generals O'Donnell and Kavanagh, after being introduced to Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart by Count Franz-Moritz de Lacy. One of them said something to him in Irish which he did not understand. "The Emperor turned quickly on me, and said: 'What? O'Kelly, don't you speak the language of your country?'- I replied, 'please your Majesty, no one but the lower orders of Irish people speak Irish.' The Emperor laughed loudly. The impropriety of the remark, made before two Milesian Generals, in an instant flashed into my mind. I could have bit my tongue off."The reference to Milesian generals is to the ancient belief that the Gaelic Irish were descended from the Iberian prince Milesius or Mil, who led them from northern Spain to settle in Ireland, naming the country Éire in honour of the goddess Éirú.The Irishmen who served in the French army during the 18th Century in particular. They turned the battle of Fontenoy to a French victory against the English.The Irish-Austrian connection is a useful reminder that hybridity and heterogeneity characterise Ireland's identities as well as those of other European nations. Their histories are interconnected and overlapping. They are, of course, also subject to change, development and breakdown, which can obscure previous links.So it has been with the Irish military tradition in Austria, which was shattered by the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1918.The Wild Geese who fled to France became prominent mercantile and wine producing class . Irish merchant families, including the Joyces, Walshes, MacCarthys, O’Sheils, Sarsfields and O’Riordans.The term ‘Wine Geese‘ emerged later to describe these and more recent Irish emigrant families who became involved in the wine trade in various countries throughout the world. Many of these families played a very important role in the development of France’s wine industry, most notably in Bordeaux.Two of the most important families that settled in Bordeaux were the Barton family and the Lynch family, who gave their names to such highly-regarded Chateaux as Ch. Leoville-Barton and Ch. Lynch-Bages respectively. Other notable Bordeaux Chateaux of Irish origin include Chateau Clark, Chateau Dillon Chateau Margaux, Chateau Phelan-Segur, Chateau Yquem and Chateau Kirwan to name but a few.Those of Wild Geese stock eventually rose to the office of president of France Patrice de MacMahon, Duke of MagentaThe Mac Mahon family was of Irish origin. They claim to be descendants of the Dál gCais Lords of Munster and were Lords of Corcu Baiscind in Ireland. After losing much of their land in the Cromwellian confiscations, a branch moved to Limerick for a time before settling in France during the reign of King William III because of their support of the deposed King James II in the Glorious Revolution They applied for French citizenship in 1749; after the definitive installation of the family in France, their nobility was recognised by the patent letter of King Louis XV of France.A military family (14 members of the house of de Mac Mahon were in the Army), they settled in Autun, Burgundy, at the Chateau de Sully, where Patrice de Mac Mahon was born on 13 June 1808, sixteenth and the second last son of Baron Maurice-François de Mac Mahon (fr) (1754–1831), Baron of Sully, Count de Mac Mahon and de Charnay, and Pélagie de Riquet de Caraman (1769–1819), a descendant of Pierre-Paul Riquet.This is a basic timeline of The Wild Geese1594-1603 : Nine Years' War (Tyrone's Rebellion)Conflict between Gaelic Irish chieftains and English rulersAfter the defeat of the Irish in the Battle of Kinsdale (1602), the rebellion was "ended with the the Treaty of Mellifont" (1603)1607 : Flight of the EarlsMarks the end of the 'old Gaelic order', as the ancient Gaelic aristocracy of Ulster went into permanent exileAbout 90 military leave by ship (14 september 1607) from Rathmullan to Quillebeuf-sur-Seine (Normandy)A small diaspora took place, with some reaching Leuven (Flanders) but the main group travelling to RomeHugh O'Neill, 2nd Earl of Tyrone (Tír Eóghain)Rory O'Donnell, Earl of Tyrconnell (Tír Chonaill)Donal O'Sullivan, Lord of Beare and BantryTadhg Ó Cianáin writer(kept a detailed diary of the flight)1688-1691 : Jacobite War (Williamite War)Conflicht between catholic king James II and protestant king William of Orange of the throne of England, Scotland and IrelandThis conflict became 'accessory' to a broader European "Nine Years' War", fought 1688-1697 between French king Louis XIV and a grand alliance between the English, Dutch, Spanish and Italians.The catholic Jacobites were defeated at the Battle of Aughrim in 1691, and the war was "ended with the Treaty of Limerick" (1691)Many Irish Jacocbites went into permanent exile. As the French had given their support to the Irish catholics, the Irish Jacobites initially headed for France. Subsequently, Irish officers ended up in miliary service across the continent - mainly in France, Austria and SpainUp until 1745, the Irish authorities allowed Irish military to take service in foreign armies (to facilitate exile). Since 1745, it was outlawed - and many military never returned.1690 : the Irish BrigadeFormed in May 1690, comprising 5 regiments with 5,000 menCompensation for French support in the Jacobite WarThe Irish Brigade remained part of the French army until 1792Whilst many other nationalities joined after 1745, the officers remained IrishRobert ReidDaniel O'Brien, 3rd Viscount ClareTheobald Dillon, 7th Viscount DillonJustin McCarthy Viscount Mountcashel...1691 : Flight of the Wild GeeseAfter the Treaty of Limerick (1691), many Irish Jacobites opted for exileSome 14,000 soldiers left Ireland, as well as 10,000 women and childrenLed by Patrick Sarsfield, they became King James' army in exile, in ParisPatrick Sarsfield, Earl of LucanJames FitzJames, 1st Duke of BerwickArthur Dillon, Count of Dillon, Earl of DillonGerald O'Mullally (Gerard Lally), Brigadier GeneralFrancis Bulkeley, Count BulkeleyEdward Charles Rothe, Count RotheOliver O'GaraThe term ‘Wine Geese‘ emerged later to describe these and more recent Irish emigrant families who became involved in the wine trade in various countries throughout the world. Many of these families played a very important role in the development of France’s wine industry, most notably in Bordeaux.The Wine Geese in FranceTwo of the most important families that settled in Bordeaux were the Barton family and the Lynch family, who gave their names to such highly-regarded Chateaux as Ch. Leoville-Barton and Ch. Lynch-Bages respectively. Other notable Bordeaux Chateaux of Irish origin include Chateau Clark, Chateau Dillon Chateau Margaux, Chateau Phelan-Segur, Chateau Yquem and Chateau Kirwan to name but a few.Similarly Irish families have made their mark in other European wine countries such as Spain, Italy and Germany, as well as further a field in Australia, Chile, New Zealand and the United States.The Wine Geese in AustraliaIn Australia, the well-known Clare Valley wine region actually takes its name from County Clare in Ireland. Some notable Irish ‘wine families’ in Australia include the Barry family of the Jim Barry winery in South Australia, who makes one of Australia’s most famous Shiraz wines called ‘Armagh’, the O’Shea family of Mount Pleasant winery in New South Wales and the Horgan family of Leewin Estate in Western Australia.The Wine Geese in the United StatesIn the United States, Irish families have been equally influential in the wine industry. Examples include the Barrett family of famed Chateau Montelana, the Concannon family of Concannon Vineyards, whose winery is reputed to be the oldest continuously operating winery in the United States as well Murphy-Goode, Mayacamas, Sequoia Grove and Thomas Fogarty.The Wine Geese in Chile and South AfricaTwo of Chile’s most well known wine producers Errazuriz and Undurragas are directly descended from Irishman John McKenna. And in South Africa, the well known producer Hamilton Russell, whose Chardonnay is among one of my favorites, was started by Irishman Tim Hamilton-Russell, whose parents emigrated to South Africa as recently as the1970’s.The Wine Geese: What You May Not Know About Ireland’s Contribution to theWorld of Fine Wine | KitchLessons from history - the Wild Geese and the Irish inEuropePatrice de MacMahon, Duke of Magenta -Wikipediahttp://www.theirishstory.com/201...Barry Lyndon - WikipediaMichael Collins's answer to What explains the Irish military diaspora?Michael Collins's answer to Is there an Irish foreign legion?

Because markets and commerce alone isn't what makes capitalism. The modern state is what makes capitalism, and a capitalistic economy isn't possible, nor even conceivable, without the whole political, bureaucratic, legal and military apparatus of modern nation states, which began to form in Western Europe from about 1500s onward. That this needs to be spelled out just shows how ahistorical the science of economy has become.Folks who subscribe to the whole free market + work ethics = capitalism! nonsense may imagine that in ancient societies, always one step from hunger and chaos, people went around trading clay pots for loincloths or whatever, in some idealized paleo-liberal market of unregulated bargain. But in reality, almost all pre-modern states were top-down, closed, dirigist and communitarian systems, based on a hierarchy of three general social strata:The vast bulk of population consisted of autonomous and autarkic, clan-based communities. These produced and shared all of their basic commodities between themselves, and consequently had neither the time nor the means, nor indeed the need, to go around shopping for stuff.Ruling over them was a thin layer of nobility/priesthood who managed overall resources, collected tributes, stored surpluses, and (re)distributed goods. The English word lord, for instance, comes from Germanic hlāf-weard, “loaf-warden”, i.e., “keeper of bread”; and noble titles involving granaries, storehouses and food/water management were dime-a-dozen in ancient world.At the top and center of it all was the king and his court, whose sacred duty was to ensure that this entire system works, that everyone has his/her place and all are provided for. But in return, it was understood that he owned everything, down to people’s very lives, if need be. There was hardly a concept of the individual person, let alone of individual property, and the social contract was based on idea of an extended family, with the ruler as an all-powerful patriarch; or, less romantically, on the idea of a human flock, shepherded by a semi-divine herdsman.^ The schematic layout of pretty much any ancient civilization ever.Now it ought to be clear that in such a society, commerce and finance were possible only if sufficient surplus was accumulated; furthermore, that only those who had command over that surplus could engage in commerce; and finally, that they traded mostly in luxury items and trinkets meant to boost their own prestige. For all those reasons, merchants were generally despised in ancient cultures, being seen as parasites who live on the greed of ruling elites, drain societal surplus or even deplete its human pool, by selling people into slavery. Financiers were thought as even worse, loaners and usurers who “neither reap nor sow”, but build their fortunes on people’s misery, enslaving all in debt. Therefore, such professions were generally outsourced to various groups of “untouchables” (Jews, Gypsies, strangers in general, etc.) that had no permanent place in settled society, and were indeed often subject to persecutions and purges, in which rulers would grab their wealth, and common people vent off their frustrations.^ Of the four horsemen of Apocalypse, the third one (bottom left) was described in very merchant-like terms:I looked, and behold, a black horse; and he who sat on it had a pair of scales in his hand. And I heard something like a voice in the center of the four living creatures saying, "A quart of wheat for a denarius, and three quarts of barley for a denarius; but do not damage the oil and the wine."Revelation 6:5-6Now capitalism is, by contrast, an economic system that runs on debt. In it, we start by taking out a loan, to acquire wealth we don’t yet have, for a profitable business venture (like say, sailing round the Cape to get spices from Indies, or opening up a brand new cotton-spinning mill); then we distribute this fictional wealth in the form of credit (or more generally: money) to people who will be doing all the work; and only then we began to produce or acquire the actual wealth. With a delayed start but a powerful boost to it, like an economic slingshot effect, this allows production on otherwise unimaginable scale, enough to pay back all of the starting loans (plus interests) and acquire a substantial profit.This is exactly the reverse of traditional, autarkic economic systems, where the basic assumption is you first need to produce a surplus before running into debt, either for trade or finance. In capitalism, the implicit assumption is that there’ll always be more imaginary wealth (loans, credit, money, in a word: debt) with which the production of actual, physical stuff will have to continually catch on. Thus, far from seeing debt as a source of misery, a sign of wastefulness, or even as personal/ethical flaw (i.e., “sin”), capitalism sees it as a powerful fuel for an unprecedented economic development.But in order for such a system to work, you need to reorganize the entire state and society around it. You need a government that will protect both the lenders and borrowers, by ensuring the former won’t be looted and killed for supposedly poisoning the wells; and the latter that they won’t be sold into slavery with their families if they fail to repay the debt. You need disciplined armies whose main task will not be conquering new agrarian communities to impose levies upon, but rather clearing roads, securing trade routes and protecting merchants from brigands and pirates. You need professional bureaucracy, made not out of priests and philosophers who’ll preach as to why the human flock must meekly obey its ruling herdsman and his pack of dogs; but rather, of legalist clerks and pedantic accountants, who’ll continually calculate and manage the complexities of this intricate system.The place and time where this new societal synthesis first began to take form were various medieval Italian city-states, whose elites began to dabble in finance, trade and manufacture, against the backdrop of feudal Europe. While people are mostly familiar with merchant republics of Venice, Genoa and Florence, it was in fact in Milan where the prototype of modern state came into being, under the rule of pro-imperial Visconti family; specifically, during the reign of the first Milanese duke, Gian Galeazzo Visconti, at the very end of 14th century:His love of order was so precise that he may be said to have applied the method of a banker's office to the conduct of a state. It was he who invented bureaucracy by creating a special class of paid clerks and secretaries of departments. Their duty consisted in committing to books and ledgers the minutest items of his private expenditure and the outgoings of his public purse; in noting the details of the several taxes, so as to be able to present a survey of the whole state revenue; and in recording the names and qualities and claims of his generals, captains, and officials. A separate office was devoted to his correspondence, of all of which he kept accurate copies. By applying this mercantile machinery to the management of his vast dominions, at a time when public economy was but little understood in Europe, Gian Galeazzo raised his wealth enormously above that of his neighbors.John Addington Symonds, Renaissance in Italy: The age of despotsMilan became the economic powerhouse of Italy, and one of the centers of early Renaissance, rivaling Venice itself in terms of wealth. Its steel industry was second to none, producing arms and armor for half of European armies; it built an impressive system of canals for trade, transport and irrigation through waterways of Lombardy; and it could finance such enormous projects as the famous Duomo and the Sforza Castle. The crowned serpent on the crest of Visconti (Biscione) eventually became the symbol of Milan as whole, and today it’s the logo of elite Alfa Romeo line of cars; a sort of a cultural memory, if you will, of this long tradition of industriousness.This model of proto-capitalist state was imported from Milan, first to France in 15th century, by the “Spider king” Louis XI; and from there into England, by his protogee Henry Tudor, where it could take firm hold and develop through following centuries, unfettered by either wars or remnants of feudalism on the continent. And it was only in late 18th century, when England became an economic superpower whose industries could not be matched by any other country in the world, that English economists began to popularize ideas how free trade and individual entrepreneurship is all you really need for capitalism to work.It is a very common clever device that when anyone has attained the summit of greatness, he kicks away the ladder by which he has climbed up, in order to deprive others of the means of climbing up after him. In this lies the secret of the cosmopolitical doctrine of Adam Smith, and of the cosmopolitical tendencies of his great contemporary William Pitt, and of all his successors in the British Government administrations.Any nation which by means of protective duties and restrictions on navigation has raised her manufacturing power and her navigation to such a degree of development that no other nation can sustain free competition with her, can do nothing wiser than to throw away these ladders of her greatness, to preach to other nations the benefits of free trade, and to declare in penitent tones that she has hitherto wandered in the paths of error, and has now for the first time succeeded in discovering the truth.…Had the English left everything to itself—'Laissez faire, laissez aller', as the popular economical school recommends—the [German] merchants of the Steelyard would be still carrying on their trade in London, the Belgians would be still manufacturing cloth for the English and England would have still continued to be the sheep-farm of the Hanseatic League…Friedrich List, The National System of Political Economy